From: Markus Schöpflin (markus.schoepflin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-08-25 12:05:27
Richard Hadsell wrote:
> Markus Schöpflin wrote:
>> Currently, the name mangling scheme used on this platform is the
>> default one selected by the compiler. It turns out that this is a bad
>> choice when compiling boost. ...
>> Therefore I propose to explicitely set the name mangling to ansi in
>> the tools file for this compiler. Does anyone have any strong feelings
>> or arguments against such a change?
> Wouldn't this force users to compile all of their code with nondefault
> name mangling? I would prefer that the docs include some warnings about
> the problem, with instructions about how to alter the name mangling.
> Making nondefault compiler behavior the default for using boost places a
> burden on the users rather than making it easier for them.
To be precise, every user using a compiled boost (or any other C++)
library has to compile and link his code with the same name mangling as
the already compiled code.
> Instead, just make sure it's easy for users that are already using the
> alternate name mangling to configure boost for it.
The problem is, currently there are numerous regression test failures
due to the use of the old name mangling scheme, which go away when ansi
name mangling is selected. Therefore I though it would be a better
alternative to use the more working alternative and document that the
old name mangling scheme gives troubles when used with boost.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk